happy new year. i met you last year at this time. you mentioned the cost of detainees. and the cost, not a dollar cost, but the cost to the united states in terms of reputation and credibility of having guantanamo bay is probably much higher than the dollar cost. at the end of the presidential election, one of my friends in japan -- i'm japanese -- wrote to me and said it is a pity that the american people -- the better choice for the american people was a flunky such as president obama. the reason he called president obama that was because he cannot even deliver on the very simple statement that he's going

to close guantanamo bay. listening to you, it is a little murky. i'm not so sure whether you are concerned about the civil rights of the prisoners or the fact that guantanamo bay itself is something the u.s. should not keep open. so my question, is it closing guantanamo bay or giving justice to the people and the 186 people? when you go on that track, and everybody loses track of what is really the issue. >> i don't understand the distinction. it's not just to hold people indefinitely without. guantanamo is the symbol of that. you've got to get them out of there and close it. >> i don't want to get in an argument. >> your first point about the

cost, not the economic cost that you can put a dollar figure on but the cost to america, the intangible cost. i think we saw that not long ago with the man extradited from the u.k. to america. i guess the u.k. is our closest allies in the war on terror and our closest ally made us promise that before they would extradite him we would not send them to guantanamo, that he would not be prosecuted in the military commission, which to me is a statement about guantanamo and the military commissions. we have to promise our closest friend that we will not to use it or they will not give us that prisoner. >> we have two minutes left. anything anybody wants to say in closing? >> i want to repeat again that i think -- there are some people at the guantanamo who should justifiably be punished and they should be tried

accordingly and punished. for some, justice will be getting them out of prison. guantanamo is not a way of doing that, because it is isolated, outside the normal u.s. court system, and it is stuck in the d.c. circuit. there are a lot of little practical problems to getting it closed. it is very easy when there are political problems. when i look at the president, i want to say "this is your legacy, get it done. put somebody in charge in the white house to do it. put your own power behind it. there are lots of problems in this country, from the fiscal cliff to the next thing. this is a moral issue that defines our nation. it will define your presidency.

you will be to blame if this is not done. get it done." >> indefinite detention is an abomination, legally, morally, ethically -- the reality that all the men who are held at guantanamo and will be for the foreseeable future, unless we can act on that. we can begin by highlighting and acting on the most formal injustice, of clearing people for release and not releasing them. if you did not know that before, some of these men were put in their eight years ago and are still held. >> i would say that america is a light unto the world, and is a question whether we are a warning or a guiding light, and i think we should be a guiding light. >> thanks to you for coming. [applause] [captions copyright national

cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] next, mike thompson holding a public meeting on ways to reduce gun violence. then the consumer credit protection bureau public hearing and new rules for qualifying home mortgages. after that, "q&a with author jason brennan. -- key winick" with opera jason cornyn. -- "q&a" with author jason brennan. for more details on student ca m, go to our web site. mike thompson posted a four on thursday in santa rosa to allow the public to oyster opinions on the issue.

he heard from state law enforcement officials and mental health officials. this portion is just under two hours. >> i have the pleasure of introducing congressman mike thompson. he was first elected to congress in 1998. he serves on a subcommittee of help, select revenue measures in the subcommittee on ways and means, as well as being the ranking member on the subcommittee on terrorism, counterintelligence, and the subcommittee on oversight, all within the select committee on intelligence. congressman thompson is a combat veteran. he was a staff sergeant platoon leader in vietnam with the 173rd airborne of the united states army. he is also a purple heart recipient. mike has a reputation for problem-solving, reaching across the aisle. he had been a great asset for the county of sonoma. mike is also a gun owner and an avid hunter, i understand. i can think of no one better

suited to serve as chair of the congressional gun violence prevention task force. congressman, thank you very much for your work, and welcome. >> thank you. [applause] thank you very much, and think you all for coming out tonight. this is the third town hall meeting on our efforts to prevent gun violence. input from the public is extremely important, so i am honored that you took time to come out tonight and share your constructive ideas with how we could accomplish this. i just cannot emphasize how important it is. as everyone knows, emotions got extremely high. motivation and constituent input to do something about gun violence hit an all-time peak after the terrible tragedy in connecticut. there is no question, that is the worst gun tragedy i have ever seen in my life, and i can

understand why people, communities are upset, why they are concerned, and why they want something done about it. but i also want to caution folks that there is no one bill that can be passed, not one magic wand that can be waived that could guarantee that we never have problems like that, and we cannot move forward by judging our efforts on the last tragedy. as bad as that was, gun violence is with us every day. we see it most often when it is a huge tragedy, such as connecticut, but the truth is, since that connecticut tragedy, there has been over 800 people killed with firearms in our country. the american people have said a loud and clear, they wanted to done about it. i have been appointed to chair a task force to do something about it.

as the chairman said, i am a gun owner, a combat veteran, i am a hunter. i understand guns. i understand the only way we can do is if we all come together, we are all at the table, and everything is on the table. that is the only way we will be able to forge a solution that works and makes sure our communities are safer than they are today. so i am looking forward to your constructive comments as to ideas you might have on how we can accomplish that. right up front, i want to state clearly and succinctly. this is not a listening session for a hearing on the second amendment. that issue is not what we're talking about. the second amendment is guaranteed in the constitution of the united states of america. when the court ruled -- when the u.s. supreme court ruled in

the heller decision -- they took this away from the argument. no longer can focus on one side say, we can own any gun we want, and no longer can folks on the other side say this only pertains to a militia. the court was clear. u.s. citizens have a right to own firearms, period. government entities have a right to pass regulations and laws pertaining to those firearms, but americans have a right to own firearms. please remember that. if we do, that will help us get through all of the speakers, giving everyone time to talk. there is an old saying in congress. everything has been said but everybody has not yet said it. i do not think we have to do that. if you are not redundant, it will give everyone time to talk, and maybe we can have some good ideas out there on how to forge a solution.

we are in pretty good shape tonight on our panel. we have some real experts. i will ask each one of them to make some brief opening comments. they are here to clear up any issues, and more important, like me, they are here to listen to any ideas that may come about. first, i will start with mike kennedy, sonoma county department of mental health. >> thank you. the comments i would like to focus on, we know for individuals with mental health the very issues and also a serious mental health issues, our goal -- and a lot of folks in california know, with the mental health service act, our goal is to intervene earlier, provide better access, and link

people to treatment. we believe that would help things in general. one of the things that i wanted to talk about, through the mental services help act in this county, have implemented one new program that is worth mentioning, and it is called a mark crisis assessment prevention and education team. it focuses on -- it is a partnership with the santa rosa junior college and about nine high schools, and all of the city high schools. we have a county team, licensed staff, and psychiatrist who are available and go to school to do assessments. we actually sit on the crisis team at the community college so that we can talk together. since we are a part of their health center, we are able to

exchange information and then we're able to directly link students who have mental health issues directly to services. in the last year and a half we have been able to hospitalize about 10 young people, get them stabilized, and then they are able to stay in school. we were also at the high schools. the work in tandem with some of santa rosa's resource officers, with the assistant principals, and we are available to go out and do assessments. the second part of it, though, what we found was a lot of teachers, family members would say to us, we saw some issues, we just did not know what to do. the other thing that this team provides for all those settings is something we call qpr, which is question, persuade, refer. the evidence-based on that helps teachers assign mental illness, depression, suicide, and then what questions to ask,

how to persuade someone to get help, and then how to access help. that would be to bring the team out there. it has been so successful at the schools. we are training incoming freshmen, the whole class, in qpr. it allows us to target young people between the ages of 16 and mid-20's that are having either first psychotic breaks or mental illness. it is one of the programs and i think is extremely effective and could help in preventing some of these things. >> thank you. next, sheriff freitas. >> thank you for inviting me to be on this panel, and thank you

for taking the time to come out and share your thoughts. i am appreciative to see this large of a crowd to come and talk to us. i am primarily interested in listening to people's ideas, whether here or locally or at the state level. from an enforcement standpoint, one thing i would like to mention that maybe we could accomplished through this process would be, many of us in law enforcement -- and i spoke to many of my chiefs of police today -- we feel the laws are, quite frankly, confusing. it is hard to enforce on the street level aspect because laws are hard to interpret and understand. if it is hard for us, that must be hard for the public. we would like to see those lost simplify to some extent, and an enforced. other than that, i would listen to what people have to say. >> thank you. next, district attorney jill ravitch. >> is a pleasure to be here

tonight. it is a pleasure because the subject is done on prevention. unfortunately, my experience is in the gut -- aftermath of gun violence. my job is dealing with what happens after the carnage, dealing with victims, try to figure out the proper way of dealing with the offenders. i would be like to lose that opportunity through prevention. i'm exciting to hear what mike kennedy is doing with mental health. one of the results of that tragedy in connecticut was it got us talking about mental illness and what we can do better as a community to deal with the slowness problems and integrate those individuals into our community and provide services. like the shares and others here, i am here to listen and look for better solutions, and ultimately, i am here to find better ways to prevent gun violence. >> thank you. next, dr. steve harrington, superintendent of sonoma county schools.

>> i am here on behalf of the professional teaching community. before i make my opening comments, on behalf of the teachers in sonoma county, we wish to honor and express our respect for the students, teachers, administrators, and psychologists who lost their lives at sandy hook elementary school. we remember these young children who died too soon. we take a will to educate the students in sonoma county schools seriously. i know that all school employees are especially attuned to this issue of school safety and student will been following this horrible incident. the educators who sacrificed their lives at sandy hook did so because they were committed to creating a better world for teaching. let us keep their memories alive through their own and our own dedicated work in sonoma county schools. our scoot -- students are the hope and promise for the future. as the county superintendent, i

wish to reassure you that every one of our schools within sonoma county have current and on-file school safety plans. many of our schools have cooperative policing agreements or school resource officers at the secondary level, 9-12. every k-8 school conducts safety drills once a month. every high-school conducts a quarterly drill each year. of those drills, two must be at least lockdown, and two are earthquake. as resources are available to schools, we are required to retrofit and redesigned our campuses through the post- columbine design requirements that came out of that terrible incident. the teaching professionals and administrators and school classified employees who worked diligently with the school board and community with to provide safe campuses for every child. but we're also where we can increase the safety by reducing the risks, and that is why i'm here tonight, to listen to the way we can reduce the risks to

our children and teachers. most of our campuses are not designed as well as the school at sandy hook. that was a self-contained school that did not have the open patio affect the california schools do. so we have a more difficult to tuition in securing our schools for lockdown. but one of the good things about our community, under proposition 63, which you passed a few years ago, we were able to initiate a pilot program for mental health. i think it is in our communities interest to know what we are doing and i hope more of these results will be shared with the total community. >> thank you. next is special agent blake graham with the state department of justice, who probably should get a pen for being at three of these. >> good evening, everyone.

i am here to talk about two programs at the california department justice is involved in first of all, background checks. the department of justice, bureau of firearms conducts a firearm background for the state. we query many different databases, restraining order systems, warrants, criminal history, mental health, we check for convictions in state come out of state, and various other federal assistance as well. last year -- two years ago, we did 601,000 background checks. in 2012, we did 812,000. so far this year, as of yesterday, 27,000 already. there has been a big spike in the number of background checks. the other side of that is the people that are denied consistently, about one-third of 1% applied. that is held up over many years. those people that purchase done

sloppily sometimes become prohibited later. that leads to the second program i would talk about, and the arms derivative person system. at one point, those people purchased a gun. at some point, they could come prohibited by a mistake of their own, legally, maybe a mental health issue, things like that. currently, there are about 19,000 people, depending on the day. it fluctuates. these people have a prohibition of some kind and they have about 39,000 weapons associated to them statewide. we have to teams out just about every day of the week. there are only 33 agents in the state at the time to contact these people. we are small but we are doing we can. there are teams out tonight in different parts of the state.

i think that is probably all i have. >> the 39,000 guns in possession of people who are prohibited from owning guns, those are only handguns and assault weapons? >> correct. those are the weapons we're able to track, handguns and registered assault weapons. so the reality is, there could be a lot more than that? >> correct. generally, we will seize a few that we know about, generally levels and shotguns also that are not in the system currently. >> as you can tell by the panel, this is a very complex issue, gun violence prevention, and it crosses many disciplines. it deals with mental health, education, it deals with background checks, in dealing with the guns and accessories themselves, as well as a

culture of violence that is also very difficult to deal with. you think the second amendment stuff is tough, try the first. we have a lot of work cut out for us. if you have ideas, we want to hear them. >> folks who want to speak, fill out a speaker card and hand them to the staff at the front. everyone will have a minute and a half. if you look to your left, there is a traffic signal in green means you have plenty of time, yellow means you have 30 seconds, and red means your time is up. we will try to remind you when you are gone. >> and you will call five at the time? >> yes. five at a time. before the fifth speaker speaks, i will call the other five up so that we do not have any breaks. are we ready to go?

>> we are ready. >> with the first five please come up? [reading names] >> i would like to be entered in but i cannot give you my name. for security reasons. i am an ex-military officer. >> let these speakers speak, please. >> how do i get in on that list? >> fill out a yellow card and then put in anonymous. then they can call you up. thank you. >> go ahead, shirley. >> thank you, congressman

thompson, for being here. i am glad that you have been appointed to this important committee. as tragic as gun homicide is, particularly when it falls our precious children, i want to make sure that the relationship between guns, gun ownership, suicide, and veteran suicide is part of the dialogue. i want to share some sobering statistics. suicide is the leading cause of firearm deaths. in 2009, the u.s. firearm suicides total was over 18,000. a 11% increase from 2006 as compared to half that number of homicides. although most gun owners reportedly keep a fire arm in their home for protection or self-defense, 83% of gun- related deaths in gun owner homes are the result of a suicide, often by somebody other than the gun owner. homes with guns are five times more likely to experience the

suicide of a household member than homes without guns. five times. death by fire arm is the fastest growing methods of suicide. unlike suicide attempts using other methods, 92% of suicide attempts with a gun are fatal, meeting a temporarily depressed person who uses a gun on never get a second chance at life. individuals are nine times more likely to die by suicide if a loaded gun is in their house. congressman thompson, i know that you are a veteran and i know veterans issues are near and dear to your heart, as they are to mine, and i brought up a photo of my dad who was a marine veteran. i just want to share a couple of facts and then ask you for what i would like to address here tonight. 20% of u.s. deaths from suicide are veterans, yet veterabs make up only 10% of the population. veterans are more likely than the general population to use

firearms in the means of suicide, and among male veterans, 84% have completed suicides involving firearms. i'm going to give my conclusions, i will finish within one minute. >> you can give me your close later. >> thank you for being here tonight. >> hello, mike. this is ian cheney. i know that you know me. ian was with jerry the day that he was murdered. i will not be able to tell you the whole story, but i will start. thank you for a long me to speak today.

you knew jerry very well. my husband jerry, excuse me -- was murdered on august 27, 2011. this is the issue that you face today and our country faces. it is the very issue that i have struggled with every day since jerry's murder. the mendocino county d.a.'s report showed not only was his murderer known by the family to be mentally ill and a drug user, but also at the semi automatic weapon he used to gun down jerry was given to him by a family member. it is suspected he was able to purchase the multiple round clips legally himself. jerry worked for a local timber company. he was accompanied by a neighbor to verify a report that there was a trespass grove on the property.

that neighbor is ian cheney. jerry was armed but even carried a gun that day, not an automatic weapon, but a handgun, a gun he had to use. in firing that handgun he was able to surprise the killer and gained just enough time to escape with the killer chasing and shooting at him. if he did not have that handgun, ian would not be standing with me tonight, and he would left behind a beautiful little girl and a loving wife. i strongly support our right to own and use guns, however, the unchecked acts of on the criminals take away the rights of others to live a safe and protected life. what to do now? you will hear a thousand solutions. but i say, enforced laws we have.

every law enforcement agency i have talked to -- [applause] sing the same song. budget cuts, lack of trained personnel, lack of a will to prosecute. gun owners have a responsibility to keep those guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, drug users, and convicted criminals. thank you very much. [applause] >> hello. my name is ted heinrich. that is a difficult speech to follow. i am not unfamiliar with guns. as a cadet, i was on an award winning rifle team in chicago, illinois, so it is not out of

some sort of fear that i speak on this tonight, but i am appalled at the reckless distribution of firearms in this country and a tragic destruction of lives and families that this is causing. we have laws on the books to control sales, for example, but there are so shot through with polls and exceptions that there are meaningless for their purpose. for example, if it makes sense to do background checks on gun buyers in stores, why is it not equally sensible to do background checks for internet sales or sales at a gun show? we need to license cars and drivers because its equipment

and use poses a danger to the public -- its misuse. we need to apply the same reasoning to gun-control. i hope, ultimately, -- am i out? >> thank you very much. >> a point of clarification while waiting for the next speaker, we do in california, but in other states we do not. this is a national issue, so all of these things need to be taken under consideration. next speaker please. >> good evening. my name is susan spier. i am a resident of sonoma county. i do not have anything profound to say. i just want to thank you for taking the time. this is a very complex issue, and one that is deeply felt, i am sure, by everybody in the room. i am just hoping that in time we can find a way to curtail a

lot of what is happening. thank you. >> james johnson. mike malone. john logan. michael. margaret fishman. >> i am james johnson, a retired school psychologist here in sonoma county. i have been a credentialed school psychologists for over 40 years. it needs to be early intervention, very early intervention, kindergarten, first grade level. the needs to be clear and available help for all students at early ages. early intervention is the key. your mental health programs are key to getting students early. we have a situation where many students are identified early on and there is no way for

parents to assess -- access services, on the mandated by juvenile court, or they volunteer. i have several parents call me in my private practice and publicly that their kid, by the time they reach 12, 13, are out of control. early intervention is key to this issue. it must be engineered carefully and complete all over the state. thank you. [applause] >> i am a geologist. i spend a significant amount of time on the north coast, increasingly populated by drug cartels, pit bulls, and occasional cougar. personal defense is important to me. congressman thompson, your committee has waded into deep water here. your actions and policies could save lives or they could have some serious unintended consequences. it is obvious to me there are those who oppose the second

amendment, and i answered not implying that to you, but there are those who do that and they use political subterfuge to believe undo these fundamental rights by means of agencies, bureaucracies, and obscure regulation that neuter this right without having to answer to the american people. california, for example -- and i realize this is a federal thing -- but california has created a twisted maze of firearm regulations, leaving the honest citizen who uses or carries a fire arm responsibly, including for the purpose of legitimate personal safety and defense, in constant jeopardy of being criminalized. our legislature's response, there is now a proposal to double down on failure and fingerprint people who buy ammunition. a promise that you and your committee will recommend, that all proposed federal firearm

regulations will be openly debated and voted on in congress. and not imposed on americans by executive order. [applause] i would expect that if the president runs the democratic process that is our congress, you and your committee members would protest loud and clear. [applause] >> the more clapping and stuff that goes on, the longer it is going to take to get through the speakers. we will only be here till 9:15. i would suggest that we do not show that effort. i want to point out what the administration can do by executive order, that was my first question, what can the president do.

he can appoint an atf director, something that has not been in place and needs to be in place. he can prosecute prohibited purchases purchasers who tried to buy guns. require federal agencies to report records to the instant background check service. he can remove the remaining restrictions from the fy-14 budget that restricts money to be used to trace crime data, something that even the original author of that effort said was foolish, and he wished to go back and undo it. and that's it. [applause] >> my name is john logan. i am 100 percent disabled, retired vietnam veteran.

i am grateful recipient of two ak rounds. i see no practical purpose to owning assault weapons except to destroy human life. at the same time, i am not in favor of gun control. if there are 200 million weapons in this country already -- >> 300. >> that is one per person. less than 50% of the people on those weapons. >> 20%. >> you will have a hard time getting them back. i know within 5 miles of here i can pick up a thompson machine gun without talking to anybody. one of the things it might be included in one of the bills to be comprehensive is to have a generous buyback program,

especially in these economic times, the a lot of people might want to turn some of these weapons in. they may own three, you might get one. i do not care to ban assault weapons. if it takes more than five rounds to do away with an intruder, i should be dead or will be. all of this stuff, whether you decrease the number of rounds a magazine can hold, decrease the potency of ammunition, i believe if you do not have a comprehensive mental health program, you have done nothing. [applause] >> thank you very much. >> i will try to talk quickly. there's 80 million gun owners in this country. most of them have families. most of them have children and those families. kids getting killed in a school is very high priority. the alternative -- senator

feinstein's ban does nothing. if you eliminate weapons, only criminals will have weapons. england is like that now. some of the upper rich people can go out and do what they call birding. where do want to go with this -- california right now -- as far as getting rid of gun violence, the first thing you of the deal with is the mind. john steinbeck, a noble laureate, has said years ago that the mind is the weapon. everything else is merely supplemental. that pretty much sums it up. anyone that wants to kill somebody is going to find a way to do it. timothy mcveigh tried to get

into the special forces. they figured that he was mentally inept and cut him loose. and he went and blew up -- >> thank you. >> my name is margaret. i am a proponent of the brady bill. i am a gun owner. there are limits to most of my constitutional rights. i may not own a surface-to-air missile or a functional tank. i would never want to ban all guns. the time is now for reasonable

federal legislation. it appears that the public and political will are now intersecting. a perfect storm, if you will. the time is now for a ban on assault weapons. i refer to high-capacity removable clips. i trust that the intent of this form is more than show and tell, and that vice-president biden's nationwide effort to pare the people will result in actual federal legislation without flaws. the nra does not speak for all gun owners. the nra is mostly a lobbying organization and represent gun manufacturers and is mostly motivated by profit. the time is now. i am not naive to think of the

limits on guns will create a crime free world. there are a host of additional areas to be addressed such as mental health and educational issues. i think we can minimize killing. the time is now. [applause] >> thank you very much. >> good evening. peter alexander. i wrote my notes down. almighty see, almighty be. with the almighty spirit be upon us all. highest praise on to the living lord. we wrestle not with flesh and blood. mental illness be with those seeking to maintain the insane, resulting in homeless vets and children, never-ending wars.

the slaughterhouse murder of 14 million sentenced today and the day after and day after. also connecting to dennis kucinich's current effort assisting gulf war vets from 92 to 2002, murdered by genocide. my knowledge a firsthand. i have been privy to conversations with these people throughout the 1980's. one last sentence.

detectives james rothstein has stated that certain people never get prosecuted because of their connections. i hope this is not the case. thank you. >> next. you've not been called, sir. you need to go back and take a seat. >> hi. i live in petaluma. thanks for holding this forum. i am glad to hear you mention the high-grade shotguns of the aristocracy uses in england. help it does not come to that. it seems to be that politicians

are aiming for rifles and pistols to be taking out of the citizens' hands and only birding guns will be left. i hope some point in the future you have may be a forum on hospital violence, for example. for more people are killed by medical actions in america than by guns. i am always fascinated that the first amendment is interpreted so liberally as to include a jar of urine with a crucifix in it, yet the second amendment is interpreted so strictly that the rights of the people shall not be infringed. it's somehow does not apply in many cases. i am glad to hear you say that

guns are protected by the second amendment. what seems to be happening is politicians going after ammunition. the want to increase the cost of ammunition to a point where it is unusable. thank you. [applause] >> i am a firearms instructor. we train 40,000 people per year. we have a standing offer the and the administrator or schoolteacher would like to be trained to come to our program for four days. we will turn out with more skill than 90% of police and 9% of military. mike, i've got a letter you did not get yet. it is from day founder and ceo of that company.

the common factor we say in these instances is psychotropic drugs. virtually every one of these maniacs was either on drugs are coming off of drugs, leaving many in a homicidal, suicidal condition. who are the first responders? i hear people talking about the victims. there is a saying, dial 911 and die. if i am there dialing 911, i would rather have my bullet getting there faster. [applause]

>> where did you get the information on the drugs? >> it is something we have researched. >> in all three forms now, this has been brought up. i have a handout i have been given in the last two. we tried to run that out. we do not have information on that. i am not sure how some folks can randomly get that, and yet we cannot. if you can find out the source, please let us know. >> i would like to address the definition of an assault rifle.

since they're talking about a ban on assault rifles. it is my understanding that an assault rifle is a rifle capable of fully automatic fire. it requires special permission. they're mostly owned by military, not available to the public. there are some rifles that had a silhouette the looks like the same military rifles, but they are in no way the same. i would like to see a reasonable definition, and not because it looks scary or it has a thumbholes stock. correct me if i am wrong in my assumption. the bill of 1986 banned assault

weapons for public use. >> there is a legal definition in california of an assault weapon. the weapons you're talking about that require the tax stamp and special permit, those are fully automatic weapons. there are very few of those. in order to get them, you have to go through a number of troops to get it. the difference is, one semi- automatic. the other is fully automatic. >> the semiautomatics is not an assault rifle. >> the assault weapons that are banned in california, there is a definition of those. it is a rival that can take out detachable magazine and has one

of the following characteristics. it is defined in law. it is i semi-automatic. the other weapons you're talking about are fully automatic and does fall under the firearms act. >> could we please have joan davis? >> i'd like to thank mike thompson for having this hearing. i am the president of eagle forum. eagle forum has always stood for protection of property rights as well as protection of

personhood. i would like to remind you how important it is to learn from history. my husband was born in germany during the second world war. his father was from switzerland. i would like to let you know the difference between the philosophy of guns from germany and switzerland. hitler had first made sure that all guns were registered before taking over germany. he said they had to be registered because the crime rate was so high. once the guns were registered, he knew where to go to take guns away from people. switzerland, every family has to have a gun. it is given to them by the government. every adult is trained on how to use the gun. because other countries had been disarmed, hitler knew he could.

switzerland has lowest crime rate in the world. they have not disarmed. i am hoping we can learn from history. [applause] >> i am 65 years old. california native. brought up by my father to respect firearms from the time i was 8 years old. he is a world war ii veteran, european theater. i remember him saying to me, i want to be sure that you are safe from firearms. i think education is a critical issue in this. i find it hypocritical when fear and hysteria takeover

people that i would categorize as the antigun lobby or faction, because of ignorance does not eliminate the problem or change the facts. nra has a program to educate young people about how to be safe from firearms. as my father said, one day will come in contact with a firearm. i want to make sure you do not hurt yourself or anybody else with it. we enjoyed shooting sports all our lives. still do. i also want to comment on the fact that i think that the issue of assault weapons raised by the gentleman a few speakers ago was very key. there is a lot of fear and hysteria just with the terminology, assault weapon. congressman thompson, you stated there is a legal

definition for that in california. however, it is a loaded term and implies -- it implies that there is a human action involved in an inanimate object. i do not think that is possible. thank you for your time. [applause] >> thank you. >> i am john davis. i am from santa rosa. assault weapons, up one thing we should keep in mind is it accomplishes nothing. if i want to kill a bunch of people, it i can go down and get a semiautomatic rifle. it does not accomplish anything. it makes someone feel good, i

guess, that they passed a bill. it accomplishes nothing. the second item want to bring out, this whole idea of making the schools gun free zones. all that says to the criminals, come and shoot me. there is no concealed carry people here. i believe that lapierre was right. the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is having a good guy with a gun. one thing congressman thompson is familiar with is the armed security service that we have had a lot of our schools in california. a lot of the school districts already have armed people on

site. the l.a. school district has a police department. that has worked out very well. the one at redding has worked very well. [applause] >> i am from petaluma. thank you for having this forum. i would like to enter into the national discussion more about the issue of psychotropic drugs being a commonality amongst these shooters. i would like your committee to consider in evaluating how these are being handed to more individuals throughout this country without any regard for the negative side effects. another issue of like to address is, those that possess firearms, there is a newspaper in new york that has gained access to the addresses of legal possessors of firearms and

posted those of a newspaper. i believe they have gained this access through the freedom of information act. i am deeply concerned with this, the law-abiding citizens can have their private information posted on a newspaper, sending this information out to would-be wrongdoers and informing them of who is and who is not in possession of firearms. [applause] >> i am a retired police officer. i have always followed shootings. my only thrust is, we need for more intervention and far more intervention and mental health. it needs to be doubled, tripled. we need a lot more intervention

early on. when you have a disturbed child -- my kids say, look at this kid. it is amazing. mental health definitely needs more money. [applause] >> i want to thank the panel for being here. my name is gary lucas. i have an idea the will show results faster and less expensive than anything else i've heard. remove the report of the mortality from shooters. never mentioned their name again. get the media to quit naming the names, the agenda, the high

school. if people knew that they would be wiped from history, i do not think you would have to many killings. that is about all i have to say. [applause]